Pitt earns a ‘D’ on ADL’s Campus Antisemitism Report Card

The University of Pittsburgh might want to hide the Anti-Defamation League’s Campus Antisemitism Report Card from its parents.

For the first time, the university was included in the ADL’s report providing information about the state of antisemitism on campus and how universities and colleges are responding.

Pitt received an overall grade of a D, the same as Columbia University, which has become a national symbol for antisemitic activity on college campuses. By contrast, Carnegie Mellon University, the only other Pittsburgh-area university graded in the report, received a B.

Get The Jewish Chronicle Weekly Edition by email and never miss our top stories Free Sign Up

Pitt, the ADL said, performed below expectations in five categories: having an official position against BDS; having a Jewish alumni group; the level of severe antisemitic and anti-Zionist incidents; the level of other antisemitic and anti-Zionist incidents; and the level of hostile anti-Zionist student groups.

The school met expectations in six categories: antisemitism included in code of conduct and policies; advisory council to address antisemitism; mandatory antisemitism education for students and staff; clear time, place and manner policies; participated in program to address antisemitism; and interfaith initiatives on campus.

The university performed above expectations in 18 categories including: having a clear process to report antisemitic incidents; publicly condemning antisemitism; partnering with Israeli institutions; having an active Hillel and Chabad; having an active pro-Israel group; and the level of hostile anti-Zionist staff and faculty activity.

Kelly Fishman, regional director of ADL Cleveland, which serves western Pennsylvania, said the report card is a tool for understanding what’s happening on campus.

“For schools like Pitt, this is the first year they’re on the report card so, right now, it’s about getting a baseline of where things are,” she said.

The university, she said, participated in the report by filling out a survey and attending webinars hosted by the ADL. The grade, she said, will now give Pitt an opportunity to work with the ADL and alter some of the things bringing down their score.

“For instance, antisemitism is included in the code of conduct. We want to see a firmer definition and really see that continue to be enforced and to have them build their advisory council to address antisemitism.”

One thing that negatively affected the university’s score, Fishman said, is its lack of a position against BDS.

A challenge Pitt faces, Fishman noted, similar to other campuses in major cities but not those in smaller cities, is the existence of outside actors who have access to the university and its students.

Three Pitt students were physically assaulted during the last year in antisemitic incidents.

“The people were not from the university and the incidents happened off campus, but they happened to students,” Fishman said.

Pitt, she said, is already doing a lot of good things. She pointed to the university’s process for reporting antisemitic incidents, its religious accommodations policy and its willingness to condemn antisemitic incidents.

“They’re working with their partners at Hillel and Chabad,” Fishman said. “We want to continue to supply resources to them so that they can continue to do good work for all their students and make sure that Jewish students feel safe on campus.”

In an emailed statement from the university, a spokesperson for Pitt said that the university takes the feedback from the ADL’s report card seriously but it “does not reflect the breadth and depth of our work to support our Jewish community.”

Pitt, the spokesperson said, would use the report as a tool to guide future efforts.

And while university officials were pleased with Pitt’s good marks pertaining to Jewish life on campus and public safety, they were disappointed to see its score lowered because of demonstrations and incidents that “have occurred in the community — not on University property — and beyond our control.”

The grade also does not reflect the training and educational opportunities related to “antisemitism, discourse and dialogue and time, place and manner expectations,” the Pitt spokesperson said.

The university, the statement concluded, will do more.

Chabad at Pitt Rabbi Shmuli Rothstein takes the report with a grain of salt, noting that it doesn’t appear as if the ADL came to the campus in conjunction with the report and spoke with anyone related there about Jewish life on campus.

“They’re grading from behind a keyboard,” he said, adding that he believes the university is taking the rap for activities happening off campus and by outside actors.

The Shabbat experience on campus, Rothstein said, is one of the largest in the country.

“I’m not sure there’s a university that has more Jewish classes being offered — Hillel has classes on offer, Chabad has offered 13 Jewish classes this semester. In short, it has one of the strongest Jewish communities you’re going to find,” he said.

Daniel Marcus, executive director and CEO of Hillel JUC of Pittsburgh, agreed with Rothstein.

“The ADL scoreboard does not paint a holistic picture of Jewish life on campus,” he said.

Marcus acknowledged that there have been incidences of antisemitism but said the university has committed to combating that behavior and Hillel is present as an advocate to support Jewish students while working with the administration.

He noted that Pitt’s Chancellor Joan Gabel attended a two-day College and University Presidents Summit on Campus Antisemitism hosted by the American Jewish Committee, Hillel International and the American Council on Education.

“We will always remain vigilant and supportive to our students,” Marcus said. “Antisemitism has no place on our campus.”

Jewish Federation of Greater Pittsburgh President and CEO Jeff Finkelstein, a Columbia University alum, also took issue with Pitt’s D grade.

“For Pitt to get the same grade as Columbia makes absolutely no sense,” he said. “The Jewish Federation has been in close contact with the administration and we know that they’re trying to fight back against antisemitism.”

He also noted that many of the antisemitic incidents happened off campus “which is a difficulty with an urban-based school,” he said.

Finkelstein’s opinion of the report card is clear.

“If the ADL isn’t prepared to do these gradings in a way that makes sense then maybe they shouldn’t be doing it,” he said.

Pitt has made a public display of battling antisemitism on campus. It has created a working group on antisemitism, led by the office of the chancellor, provost and university senate president. Pitt professors Jennifer Murtazashvili and Kathleen Blee were announced as co-chairs of the group, which, the university said, will “engage proactively with Pitt and the broader Pittsburgh community to analyze and address antisemitism.”

Initially, the group’s creation was met with enthusiasm when it was announced in December. Since then, though, some community members have said the university is dragging its feet. Pitt has sent invitations to participate in the group but has yet to publicly announce a meeting.

Only days after the ADL’s report card was released, Pitt’s student body participated in a Student Government Board election that included a referendum question, introduced and promoted by Students for Justice in Palestine, asking if the university should divest from Israel. The referendum passed.

The university noted that SGB is “an independent, self-governing organization composed of elected student representatives who are responsible for advocating for student interests.”

The university said in its statement that it does not direct the group’s actions or statements and “any decisions by SGB are independent of the university and should not be interpreted as an endorsement by the University.”

SJP at Pitt was recently the subject of a disciplinary hearing by the university. No decision has been announced publicly.
Hillel’s Marcus said it was “deeply disturbing” that the BDS referendum passed.

“We are working in close cooperation with the administration to support and advocate for Jewish students,” he said.
The ADL, Fishman said, acknowledged the work that Pitt has done to stop antisemitism on campus.

“We really want to work with the university,” she said. “We don’t want them to feel like this is an attack on them. We know it’s difficult and we’ve tried to highlight what they’re doing well.”

The Chronicle reached out to several Jewish Pitt students for their reaction to the ADL’s report card but did not receive a response before publication. PJC

David Rullo can be reached at drullo@pittsburghjewishchronicle.org.